In re the Claim of Box

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Box

168 A.D.2d 729, 564 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14815

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 6, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 A.D.2d 729 (In re the Claim of Box) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Claim of Box, 168 A.D.2d 729, 564 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14815 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 4, 1990, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed and charged him with a recoverable overpayment of benefits.

Although claimant argues to the contrary, the record offers ample support for the conclusion that claimant was actively engaged in his own business and was therefore not totally unemployed for the entire period for which he received benefits. The fact that he may have still been seeking work as an employee is irrelevant (see, Matter of Schreiber [Lubin] 5 AD2d 745). Furthermore, the overpayments made to claimant [730]*730were properly recoverable under Labor Law § 597 (4) (see, Matter of Council [Roberts], 132 AD2d 437).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Casey, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 4, 1990, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed and charged him with a recoverable overpayment of benefits.

Although claimant argues to the contrary, the record offers ample support for the conclusion that claimant was actively engaged in his own business and was therefore not totally unemployed for the entire period for which he received benefits. The fact that he may have still been seeking work as an employee is irrelevant (see, Matter of Schreiber [Lubin] 5 AD2d 745). Furthermore, the overpayments made to claimant [730]*730were properly recoverable under Labor Law § 597 (4) (see, Matter of Council [Roberts], 132 AD2d 437).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Casey, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 729, 564 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-box-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack